On Sep 10, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> This seems like a coherent thing for it to do, but not something
> that I would personally use. I don't think I'd use it or like having
> it there because the more complicated the algorithm it uses to
> choose what to run, the more complicate the algorithm I run in my
> brain to predict what it will do has to be. Basically, I think I am
> likely to make mistakes this way.
(That's why I thought that looking in the contents of a suffixless
file is bad.) In any case, I think that a good example here is a .plt
file -- do I really have to spell things out when "raco foo.plt" is
pretty obvious? (Also, it makes raco a replacement for setup-plt,
where you can throw drag and drop a plt file into it.)
> As an aside, I thought we talked about this back when 'raco' was
> created about whether it should also serve as 'racket'.
I don't remember if this direction was raised... I thought it was the
other way -- I remember Matthew mentioning that `racket' has a very
picky and often difficult to learn use of flag, but as a result it's
very flexible. So it seems that raco is a natural fit for the other
extreme -- very fixed by patterns, but much easier to remember.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!